policy toward iran and specifically review the iran nuclear deal. even though it was earlier this week the administration had announced the country was complying with elements of the deal, which was established by the obama administration and other countries, and even earlier as the administration reiterated that iran was a state sponsor of terrorism. we'll hear more from the secretary of state. with that in mind and specifically toward the iran nuclear deal, should the u.s. continue to be a partner in it or should we pull out of it? here's how you can let us know. 202-p 48-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. and 202-748-8002 for independents. if you wish to tweet us about this topic you can do so at c-span wj and facebook.com/c-span. how you post on our facebook page. secretary of state made comments yesterday specifically towards the deal. it was earlier that he sent a letter to congress about the administration's desire to review the deal and specifically its policy toward iran. dear dear, mr. speaker, the letter says. this letter c

that iran nuclear deal does nothing to stop iran from ever developing a nuclear weapon. tehran is also testing ballistic missiles which could one day potentially carry a nuclear war head, maybe even to the continental united states. now, president trump understands that when dealing with countries like north korea and iran, you've got to speak from a position of strength because any time weakness is shown, well, they will exploit it to their eaten advantage. perfect example of why america needs to lead from the front of the world stage to combat all these many threats, all you have to do is take a look at israel. israel share as border with. syria engaged in brutal civil war where isis is headquartered. next to iraq where the islamic state controls large portions of land and that's close to iran a country that calls for israel's destruction. now, unlike america, by the way, israel is not protected of by thousands of miles of oceans. this is country is, in fact, surrounded by enemies in complete chaos. that's why it is so critically important. listen to the warning of isr

and opposing the iran nuclear deal. this should not come as a surprise, but it is a deal. the alternative to the deal is military confrontation that nobody wants. belle: it's quite normal for incoming administrations to review policies. obama did the same for the iran policy in 2009. how is this different? >> i was at the state department in 2009. i was there for that review. but that was a review of iran policy broadly conceived. the trump administration said they are specifically reviewing deal, which makes no practical sense. everybody who put together the the vast majority, are career government officials. they were not obama political appointees. the same people that would be doing it for trump did it for obama. the difference is that trump ha people surrounding him in thes white house that have never supported the deal fro mthe beginning until now. belle: trump himself admits that iran has been of holding as part agreement. that makes it hard for him to launch an attack on the deal. >> you are right that to point

we begin with iran. secretary of state calling for a comprehensive review of the nuclear deal one day after saying that iran was complying with that deal. tillerson iran could pose the same nuclear threat as north korea. >> the trump administration is sending mixed messages on foreign policy and that has critics wondering why they are ago dating another potential d adversa adversary. let's begin our coverage is joe johns live at the white house. good morning, joe. >> reporter: good morning, chris. this new administration is saying iran is playing by the rules, but they are still reviewing the iran nuclear agreement. the latest example of this administration sort of going in two different directions on foreign policy. if you will remember, donald trump just railed against this deal while he was on the campaign trail. but now he's in the oh value office, it looks different. >> fails to achieve the objective of a nonnuclear iran and only delays their goal of becoming a nuclear state. >> rex tillerson declar

the big question with iran is how hard we push against iran's reach in the middle east. the principle outside actor in iraq, syria, lebanon. it's ramped up its policy in yemen. yemen now has become the big proxy war in the middle east. saudis, uae and increasingly the united states on one side, iran on the other. is that a place we really want to keep ramping things up? i think the secretary of defense has doubts about the wisdom of it. we have to ask, how many of our calories, how much of our resources do we want focused on the greater middle east, which has dominated the last two presidenciy presidencies. that, to me, is the big question for this administration. >> bob costa, let's talk politics, though. i'll say it. i'm a republican. >> really? >> all my views of iran, for those of you who don't know. >> this just in. >> are shaped from what i saw in 1979. and i thought the iran deal was a nightmare and i said so. thist looked like this was yet another switch. most republicans, i loved his move toward nato. i loved the move towards normalcy. there are a lot of things

. >> iran is the world? leading state sponsor of terrorism and is responsible for intensifying multiple conflicts and underminingmi u.s. interest. in countries such as syria, yemen, iraq, and lebanon. and continuing to support attacks against israel. and unchecked iran has a potential to travel thel same path as north korea. and it take the world along with it. >> sean: n joining us now it's reaction is the president of the jerusalem center for public affairs, dore gold. good to see you. great to to to be back in youre country. let's get your reaction. the united nations, constantly, and of the american anti-semitic on display again today. nikki haley tried to drive the discussion back to the number one statee sponsor of terror. the irani and hezbollah, they are fermenting all these proxy wars. your reaction. >> it's clear, if you want to create order in the world,se security in the world, you have to distinguish between those who are attacking and those who are defending. the u.n. confuses it. they attack i

iran never signed the jcpoa. iran never signed the iran deal. they're in violation of it. they present their own samples from their declared sites to the ieae. >> the ieae is supposed to check but they have to give advanced notice and they can clean up and hide stuff. >> and iran gets to provide their own samples. they get to select samples and select them from declared sites not the undeclared sites. russia moved air defense missiles and protecting sites. the obama administration had all the intelligence that iran was violating the jcpoa and is continuing to do so. >> wow. michael, thank you very much. >> a couple things occurring as michael was speaking. we're in the middle of earnings season. i don't want to get too bogged down in details. american express coming out with earnings and sales. beat estimates and the stock is up 2% in after hours trading. no so lucky for e-bay. a lot of companies do this when they get on a conference call to reporters. they talk about where they see things going. the future guidance wasn't so robust. their shares are down a couple points i

iran sentence circle meant to ten years in prison. iran says they spied for the united states. in october, then heaven candidate trump tweeted, "iran has done it again, taking two of our people and asking for a fortune for their release. another family wants president trump to follow through. >> every day i wake up, and i wonder if today is the day that i'm going to get any bad news. >> he is a businessman and scholar. his attorney says he was the only american excluded from a prison release following the iran nuclear deal. instead, in february 2016, iran arrested his 80-year-old father, a former representative of unicef. >> president obama failed to secure the release of siamak namazi. >> like the previous administration, trump officials have raised their case. >> we have joined recent calls for the immediate release of all u.s. citizens unjustly detained or missing in iran. >> this is an important step forward but it needs to be followed up by immediate and aggressive action. >> and the namazis state the situation is becoming more urgent as baquer is ill. >> if we do not secu

a comprehensive iran policy all of the threats posed by iran. it is clear there are many. >> everywhere you look, if there's trouble in the region you find iran. >> president trump never actually said he would rip up the deal on day one but he said plenty against it. >> the dumbest deal i have ever seen in the history of deal making. >> my number one priority is the dismantle the disasterous deal with iran. >> this will be a totally different deal. >> now his administration is beginning a 90 day review of the deal. >> if he thought everything was fine he would have, you know, allowed this to move forward. he is doing the prudent thing by asking for review of what's happening. >> and worry about the fact that nuclear inspectors don't have any time any where access to suspected nuclear sites. they request whether anyone would know iran is complying. iran continues to sponsor terror. hezbollah and lebanon. >> they are on the march. the list has increased dramatically since the date that the jcpoa was signed. >> those activities were kept separate.

s relations with iran. secretary of state rex tillerson announced yesterday a comprehensive review of 2015 obama-era nuclear deal with iran saying the country is still a global threat. nbc news chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell has more. good morning to you. >> good morning, alex. candidate donald trump denounced the iran nuclear deal, said he would rip it up as soon as he was elected and now is saying that they are taking a review of the entire relationship with iran, not just the nuclear deal, but everything else that involves the u.s. and iran. >> reporter: secretary of state rex tillerson denouncing the obama administration's landmark nuclear deal and declaring that iran is a threat to the u.s. and the world. >> an unchecked iran has the potential to travel the same path as north korea. and take the world along with it. >> reporter: the nuclear deal a long-time target of president trump. >> the iran deal made by the previous administration is one of the worst deals i have ever witnesse

iran is complying with the nuclear deal because the white house actually has to certify iran's compliance or noncompliance every 90 days and the trump administration has just that for the first time and that yes iran is complying. it's quite strange really. about thee been made u.s. perhaps invoking the snapback mechanism and that is and it the nuclear deal basically allows any of the six world powers who negotiated the a violation flag up and open the way for sanctions to be reimposed on iran. no violation according to the trump administration itself. the other world powers don't want that. they're adamant they want to keep this agreement. let's talk about what might be really behind this. we heard rex tillerson talking about iran provoking destabilizing the middle east. is that really the main issue? and james mathis mentioned yemen. tillerson accusing iran of undermining u.s. interests in yemen. he's referring to the iranian support of rebels in yemen. so far as to claim iran is trying to create a hezbollah style mandal shot -- militia examined. that theree reports is a very little har

. >>> a startling warning on iran, the trump administration escalating the war of words saying iran could follow the same path as north korea >>> saving on health care. an increasingly popular way families are saving money tax free on medical, dental, even prescriptions. >>> and girl scout pride, what makes this troop's bond so powerful, when they are together, they are right at home. "nightly news" begins right now. >>> good evening to our viewers in the west. bill o'reilly who has dominated cable news ratings for years is out tonight. fox news cutting ties with the fire brand commentator in the wake of a mounting trail of sexual harassment accusations and multimillion dollar payouts. the parent company of fox news announced late today the 67-year-old host of the "the o'reilly factor" will not be returning to the network. a stunning fall for one of network tv's major figures. a major conservative voice who even in the face of scandal and fleeing advertisers saw his audience remain loyal. but for a network whose workplace culture was already under fire, it all proved to be too much. our c

iran. kareem is a senior fellow, his work focuses on iraq. robin, let me ask you and tweet about this strike. not even two decades after 9/11, the u.s. military fighting on the same side as al qaeda and isis in yemen and syria. time to stop hype and coverups. does he have a point? is this in effect something that will help isis? >> i don't think it does really. technically this is a limited strike. it did not change the balance of power inside syria. the bigger picture for iran is really much like russia that syria is the most important ally it has. it's a strategic center. iran put an enormous investment and lost over 1,000 troops. i counted eight generals that died. his ally in lebanon has thousands and thousands of troops inside syria. its lost more than 2,000, 10,000 injured. the stakes really are not just president assad for iran as well as russia. the really bigger picture is do you have some influence on this important strategic property so one friend isn't becoming and that russia l

and iran. and this comes as there are multiple reports that iran in fact may be moving forward with a weapons program. the question is, what is the administration saying with this letter today? writing in an editorial, the negotiations to arrive at the existing guilt will externally complex and technical, took years to complete. even if the other countries were interested in a renegotiation, which they aren't, the administration, frankly, just isn't up to it. saying that for now the deal is doing what it is supposed to, and even he may have trouble denying that. with that, let's bring in our panel. eli lake, columnist for bloomberg. susan page, washington bureau chief. an syndicated columnist charles krauthammer. welcome. what do you think of this iran deal, with the secretary of state said, and the letter that he produced today? >> based on what secretary tillerson said today, we are going to see, in some ways, what the obama administration initially told us, only applying nuclear sanctions, a

to cancel the iran deal? sec. mattis: i believe in israel's security and whatever it takes to keep israel secure is where we stand and where we will always stand as americans. in that regard, how israel achieves its level of sustainable security is absolutely critical and that includes all the peoples here inside the borders of israel or inside the middle east. all these people will have to work together to resolve it and it has to be done in a way for the rights of all of these people. sec. mattis: we are not -- min. lieberman: we are not in a position to give advice to the american administration. -- iranian -- they are trying to undermine the stability in yemen and iraq. their efforts to create more concern.it is a big iran is the biggest sponsor in the world of terror. it is crucial to place more pressure and more sanctions on the iranian regime. >> in. >> -- next question. israeld you confirm that estimates the syrians retain between one time and three tons of credit -- chemical weapons. what would be the imp

no iran policy. there were lots of competing ideas. the reagan administration, which surprise tobit of some people, who remember how reagan swept into office and the unifying force that he seem to of presenting a new ideology and new approach to the u.s. role in the world. behind closed doors and the corridors of the white house and testimony ofm the people who experienced this, it pandemonium. both of these areas in area, werepolicy, there three basic approaches. essentially to over [indiscernible]. one cia official spoken about this, said they probably got and 40 offers per groupsom various exile saying we can do this. we can get rid of these guys. just give us the weapons. casey was taken with particular idea that involved some of the and old style activities like setting up a and broadcasting. seeing what other kind of activities they can do to create some uncertainty and hopefully dislodge the ayatollah. from the get go, he was pretty wanted to in terms he approach iran. just very quickly, to co

the revolutionary guards controls about 60% of the economy this iran. they -- in iran. they run the oil business, they control and run the oil business. the natural gas enterprises. they own the iranian telecommunications industry. they own the iranian automobile industry. yes, they make an automobile that makes the nash rambler look like a miniature rolls royce. [laughter] they handle all the smuggling that goes into iran which was required because of the sanctions that were in. the leaders of the revolutionary guards are a very wealthy group. and and should there be any kind of a revolution that would even partly succeed or disrupt the society, these people would not only lose their wealth, but they might actually end up losing their lives as well as what happened in 1979 with the revolution after khomeini came back. so that was one impetus. and the, that and the election itself sort of got them thinking we need to, you know, the sanctionses were kind of a sideline. we need to pacify the people. because, again, about 75% of the people were disillusioned. and they know

iran wants to be the dominant power, if they don't resist they will be vassals of iran. david: even though we may be overwrought about iran. the saudis. >> if the saudis want to fix the problem, allegedly a middle east problem, let them do it why let me stick with it we're worried about it happening here and if they get missile technology and put a nuke on top. they could have it here. >> there's a bigger threat to our well-being is a $4 trillion government. not all the threats that we build up and make bigger than they are. >> the nuclear threat is huge, big, gigantic and scary. and you know what? the trump administration is giving cingularty of focus. the obama administration said forget the red line in syria and time, within two months he was working secretly on the iran nuke deal and why he went soft on syria to appease iran. >> we're involved with a lot of-- >> thank you very much, gang. very, very interesting stuff. next saturday by the way, that will be president trump's 100th day in office with the government shut down looming and a new health care bill in the of

the comprehensive iran policy requires that we address all of the threatposeed by iran and it is clear there are many. ir continues to support the brutal assad regime in syria, prolonging a conflict that killed approximately half a million syrians and displaced millions more. iran supports the iran regime even as it commits atrocities in on its own people including chemical weapons. iran financing and funnels foreign fighters into syria. it sent members of the iran revolutionary guards to take part in direct combat operations. in iraq, iran provides support to some iraqi militant groups, primarily through the quds force which is undermining security in iraq for years. iran maintains a long-standing hostility towards israel, providing weapons training and funding to hamas and other palestinian terrorist organizations. indeed, and in propaganda iran foments discord. just yesterday the regime reportedly an exhibit, marked, death to israel, during a military parade. in yemen iran continues to support the houthis attempted overthrow of the government by providing military equipment, funding

as they fear iranian hegemony and a nuclear armed iran here. >> there's no question the deal with iran which paves the way to eventual iranian acquisition of the critical elements of nuclear bombs and nuclear arsenal, something we don't accept and never signed and we won't let happen. because many in the region are threatened by that same iran, immeasurably threatened more by a nuclear iran, that is brought a lot of the countries to a different thinking about israel. i think this is possibilities ultimately for peace, certainly for our common security, i think there is a recognition of that today in washington by president trump, by secretary mattis, and by secretary tiller's and him as well. i think we realize that we face common challenges and the greatest challenge is the challenge of militant islam of both countries, the shiite variety led by iran, this the sunni variety, the long-term changes from iran. other resources, developing satellites. power in the hands of a militant islamic regime and a whole world to say, a lot in the arab world understand it, we had israel understand it

government about iran? malcolm: they were very ignorant, as you know. -- expression of that was they acknowledged it also. that is why the idea had some traction with a lot of people who thought about these issues. people at the cia. everybody was after hostages alone. they wanted to see improvement. in the early part of the administration this idea surfaced more than once about getting back in to better relations with iran, using weapons to do it. and 1983.up in 1982 materials relate to that. there was a recognition we didn't know what was going on there. a reflection of that is the weight given to a document put together by nine -- none other -- about the power structures in iran. as somebody who has something to do with iran as a subject of years,n the last 10, 15 when you look at that document it is not that it is off the mark. there is some interesting stuff. where it is right and wrong may seem subtle to somebody who doesn't know a lot about the subject. but those differences make a huge difference ov

we can't trust iran. for 38 years they have never not one time, bill, kept a promise, kept a commitment. they have murdered their own people in the streets for protesting them. they've continued to sponsor terrorism through hezbollah as well as through hamas. they're the world's leading sponsor of state terrorism. this was a stupid deal. this is like unlocking the liquor cabinet and leaving the key in the hands of an unreformed alcoholic and saying you can sit next to it, we hope you'll behave well. he won't. this is why this iranian deal can't just be revised. it needs to be totally reversed. >> bill: marco rubio had the following about the legality of this agreement or otherwise when he said this to bret last night. >> i still in fact we should say that was a deal made by a previous administration. it is not legally binding, never submitted to the congress for approval. it is not a treaty. a political agreement with the previous administration. there is a new administration. >> bill: what to do now. bob

iran is complying with the deal, president trump is now considering whether to rip it up. we have all of this covered with our nbc correspondents here and overseas. let's begin in iran. nbc news tehran bureau chief has reaction from iran's leaders. >> good morning, ali. well, when america talks tough to iran, it doesn't usually go down very well here. secretary tillerson certainly had strong words. hard line elements in the country have yet to comment. as this election campaign heats up, i'm sure it is going to be a hot topic. today, foreign minister zarif, who spearheaded the nuclear talks, weighed in. tweeting earlier, worn-out u.s. accusations can't mask its admission of iran's compliance with jcpoa. obligating u.s. to change course and fulfill its own commitments. ali, it is important to note that zarif and his posboss, the president, are in this deal. they doutouted the deal as tyin political fortunes to the success of the deal. if it's in trouble, he's in trouble. also, secretary tiller

the iran deal. i don't need to tell you or our audience but obviously donald trump made ripping up the iran deal and renegotiating it at the very least a campaign priority. every single rally and he believed the iranians were lying and it was not good to allow them to develop a nuclear bomb and doing so regardless of whether this deal was in place. and this white house does decide to try to renegotiate this deal or if the decide to impos n or try to impose new tougher sanctions, what are the implications? >> reinstatement of sanctions so the implications are tremendous if you talk to people who have supported the iran nuclear deal. this wasn't a deal that just barack obama and his team made. this was a team -- a deal made with the pp5+1, not just the uk and germany and france but russia and china. incredibly complex deal. here was at its most basic. it was if they -- develop nuclear weapons if they stop developing nuclear weapons not for peaceful purposes but nefarious purposes then the crushing san

and our allied partners reached with iran last year, iran will not get their hands on a nuclear bomb. >> the fact is the agreement rereached fully implemented will bring insight and accountability to iran's nuclear program not for a small lum of years, but for the lifetime of that program. liz: secretary of state rex tillerson just moments ago condemning iran's latest provocative action, saying iran threatens the u.s., our allies and the world. >> iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and is responsible for intensifying multiple conflicts in countries such as syria, iraq and lebanon and continuing to support attacks against israel. an unchecked iran has the potential to travel the same path as north korea and take the world along with it. liz: in a major surprise announcement, secretary tillerson says the u.s. will conduct a comprehensive review of its iran policy inherited from the obama administration. it's warning if iran continues to go on unchecked. it could lead to a rebuke. they band ivment s. inspectors but called more the u.s. to deliver $1.7 billion to iran

iran warning. secretary of state rex tillerson says the nuclear deal with iran completely ignores other serious threats posed by the country he warns could be on the path to becoming the next north korea. what is the trump administration planning to do about it? putin's planes. for the second day in a row russian bombers buzz the alaska coast, and now syria's warplanes are huddled next to a russian base in an apparent attempt to protect them from another u.s. manulife strike. are the mess a message fro

he doesn't like the iran deal. in terms of complying with what's written on the paper, i think it galls him to have to be the administration, get their playing by the rules. >> just getting some breaking news from the persian gulf. we'll bring you an update right after the break. with tempur-pedic.t .. >> fox news alert developing at this hour. a u.s. navy destroyer had another close encounter with an iranian revolutionary guard, fast attack craft in the persian gulf today. two u.s. officials telling fox news the guided missile destroyer uss mayhem actually happened monday, altered course to avoid the iranian worship. it is getting details about that that this hour. a danger signal, fired players, manned the weapons when the iranian ship sped towards the u.s. worship. they close to 2,000 yards but did not come closer. this time, no warning shots fired. this is another close encounter in the persian gulf. we'll keep you covered here on fox news channel. two hours today and all week, >> it is wednesday, april 26th an

we also recognize the need to confront the destabilizing activities of iran. with the ballistic missiles to the merit time and cyber activities including lebanese habilis helping to keep them in power. the units it maintains absolute and unwavering commitment to the security into the qualitative military edge over iran or other threats. the foundation of our long-term commitment is a significant security assistance package we signed recently with israel. the most advanced u.s. technology. expansion. proliferation acss the region. it is our cooperation to defend against the ballistic missile threat. i congratulate israel on the highly successful the ballistic missile defense systems. both of which achieved initial operating capabilities. with mister lieberman i look forward to accelerating projects. and enclosing our alliance with israel as a is a cornerstone of a larger regional security architecture which includes cooperation with egypt, jordan the kingdom of saudi arabia and our golf partners. my goal is to further strengthen our partnerships in this region

in the 1960's, washington launched the twin pillars policy arming both saudi arabia and iran against the threat of communism. - a kingdom along with the united states and other friends in the area joined together to try to challenge this expansion of communist influence. - the pillars of americans grand strategy in the middle east were to have this powerful allies who could basically do our job for us and maintain security, keep the soviets out, help to prop up friendly regimes. when the irani revolution happened in 1979, it completely undermined american grant strategy in the region. - air gulf states got together and formed the gulf cooperation council. in large part, because of the concern about the iranian islamic revolution and the potential of exporting their revolution to their countries. (tranquil guitar music) - [narrator] the house of saud has ruled saudi arabia since before the birth of the modern nation in 1932. the royal family now has an estimated 15,000 members. - saudi arabia is basically named after the house of saud which basically you can call it a tribe or a clan.

i mean, we have seen a breakthrough with the iran nuclear deal that i think will block iran's path to the bomb. narrator: after intense negotiations by the united states and european nations working with iran, there was an announcement made in vienna. it is a great honor for us to announce that we have reached an agreement on the iranian nuclear issue. the people who were involved in the negotiation developed a rapport and an understanding of one another and a certain trust in what one another was saying and that they could deliver. e.u. + 3 and the islamic republic of iran welcome this historic joint comprehensive plan of action which will ensure that iran's nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful and mark a fundamental shift in their approach for this issue. kimball: barack obama was very devoted to the diplomatic approach. obama: iran will not get its hands on a nuclear bomb. the region, the united states, and the world will be more secure. kimball: combined with the pressure of sanctions, with cooperation from the europeans and other international partners, and an iranian lea

iran is complying with this nuclear deal. they're not cheating. >> that's right the question for the president today, is he going to in fact move to rip up, as he put it, the iran nuclear deal. this is something that he vowed to do as a candidate. it is also somebody he talked about doing as a president. as you know, the united states is not the only country involved in this deal. it's not as simple as just pulling out, and it would raise serious questions about the united states level of commitment to these types of international agreements. having said that, the talk, as you point out and you were there yesterday for seccer tear tillerson was skwas tough sayin they're tough in their viewing of iran. the administration argues that b iran is not doing enough to scale back and break down their nuclear program. they say the country is still moving in that direction, but if you pull out of this deal, you're allowing them to have a green light to move forward. so a lot of debate about this on both sides, and this will be at the f

, that is iran -- no one is under any illusions that iran has been a malign influence on the region, whether syria, lebanon, hezbollah, other nefarious activities, iran is as a state sponsor of terror. that is separate and apart from our concerns in the international community about its nuclear program that were , so nowd in the jcpoa what we are attending to do is conduct a 90 day review and look at our policy concerning iran written large. until the review is completed, we will adhere to the jcpoa and ensure iran is held to, strictly accountable for its requirements. you ask about the meeting tomorrow in geneva, and that is a quarterly review, a joint commission meeting. that will take place as scheduled. rather our ambassador our lead coordinator for iran nuclear implementation, will travel to vienna and leave the u.s. delegation. look, that meeting is going to look at whether iran is meeting its commitments to the jcpoa. iran will be at the table, so it will be a frank and candid exchange to talk about any concerns that any countries, any delegations have about iran's pursuit of

iran that iran is working in a military facility experimenting with things like triggering devices, high explosives, newly constructed site. this obviously would be alarming to the u.s. the iran foreign minister tweeted out, worn out accusations can't mask its admission of iran's compliance with jcpoa obligating u.s. to change course and fulfill its own commitments, and he had highlighted all the sections of the different parts of the deal. and today, zarif tweets, we'll see if the u.s. is live up to the letter let alone spirit. so far it has defied both. should i use my highlighter again. those are developments with this iran deal. let's bring in the panel. byron york, morning briefing, and syndicated columnist,krauth. >> this is a big deal. i don't think what the administration has said is quite as contradictory as some people have suggested. i think you could see the certification as a place holder, something required to be done now. at the same time, this expression of doubt whether -- before we saw this thing today, expression of doubt whether iran is, a, really complying, and

sanctions and iran for this? >> there are current terrorism sanctions against iran. and everybody has to remember that at the beginning of the negotiation, all of our allies and partners in the region said only make it about the nuclear weapon. because we're not in the room, and we don't want you deciding our interests would you tell us there. and as you know, this was a multi lateral agreement. this wasn't just a u.s. agreement. it was all the permanent members of the security council plus the european union and germany. so, this was a very serious undertaking. there weren't great choices here, but keeping iran from getting a nuclear weapon is certainly in our national security interest. >> eugene, it does seem -- you can't miss sort of the oddity of the fact there is admission that iran is complying with the agreement. >> right. >> on the other hand, you know, we do have this catastrophic issue and i even just took a trip to iraq last week. we have this catastrophic issue with iran being a sponsor of terrorism.

allies completely ignored all of the serious threats that iran poses. >> iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism and responsible for multiple conflicting and under mining u.s. conflicts in syria, yemen, iraq and lebanon and continuing to support attacks against israel. unchecked iran has the potential to travel the same path as north korea and take the world along with it. >> tillerson's comments coming a day after he certified to congress iran is complying with the deal, but questioned if sanctions shouldn't be reimposed because of iran's alleged sponsorship of terrorism. >> you heard tillerson mentioning north korea which has sky high tensions with the neighbors and u.s. today, american and south korean forces conducting the annual max thunder drill. the second largest aviation exercise on the korean peninsula. we have paula hancocks at the air base in seoul with a closer look. >> reporter: dave and alison, this is a massive air operation here in south korea. there is more than 80 aircraft involved and 1,500 people. we know it is routine and annual. we are told by the lieutenant c

russia, syria, iran -- >> dana: hezbollah. >> bob: hezbollah. they are all allies. >> kimberly: to act in concert. >> bob: what happens when the syrian government falls? >> kimberly: greg? >> greg: let me tell you what happens, bob. they played us like a cheap banjo on a bridge, when you look at our present group, mattis, tillerson, or matterson, as i like to call them -- >> kimberly: and haley. >> greg: at their poker faces have a poker face. ashamed to think they weren't at the table to stop this stupid deal. let me give you a little history lesson, because, as you know, i know very little. there are two groups to back in this, you have the sheers and the sunnies. and both sides have bad guys. who has the worst bad guys. i'm assuming the sunnis have the worst bad guys. got the other guys, 9/11, let's not forget. i'm not sure who is worse. the moral of the story, i wish they would convert to scientology and make our lives a bit easier. it is about weapons, it is about sectarian divides, and each one of these divides has people who are willing t

iran's actions threaten the united states an unchecked iran has the potential following the same path as north korea. >> is it right to talk tough against so many different regimes at the same time? >> these are decisions, i think what happened in syria, that was imposed on him. i still joined consensus that that was the right response at that time and handled quite well, thank you. the mow at-bat in afghanistan, i don't think that's a white house decision. it is a product of the white house deciding, unlike the obama administration to push decisions out to the edge, to push subdivisions down to field commanders to go ahead and make these tactcally sound decisions about having to phone home every time they want to do that. the one part where i think we might be stirring the pot a little too vigorously has to do with the rhetoric and perhaps even the president's rhetoric when it comes to north korea. >> let me ask you about this. we saw korea's new threat to the united states in the video. >> i've seen video like that before. >> they've done that during president obama's term. this is

iran is a serious threat to the u.s. today and to stability in the region, and i think the concern was that issuing a 90 day statutory requirement requiring compliance with the jcpoa was going to signal that somehow everything was okay with iran and us, and it is not okay between iran and us. >> bret: and their other factors. iran playing a role in yemen. >> serious factors that we are going to have to address, and that is what we were trying to reflect. it was a question of, do you put that in a letter to congress, or do you come out and take a strong statement the next day. we opted for the latter. >> bret: i know you had a busy day. a couple more things. your relationship with defense secretary mattis and your communication. how much do you all talk? >> i had dinner with him last night. i had breakfast with him this morning. when we are not traveling, the secretary and i speak essentially everyday. i would go so far -- wouldn't go so far as to say we are joined at the hip, but neither one of a move without the other.

or not with the iran deal. what is israel's position, does israel want the u.s. to cancel the iran deal? >> to answer your question, i believe in israel's security. whatever it takes to keep israel secure is where we will always stand as americans. in that regard, how israel achieves its level of sustainable security is absolutely critical, and that includes all the peoples here inside the borders of israel, or inside the middle east. all these people are going to have to work together, we're going to have to resolve it and it's got to be down in a way that looks out for the rights of all those people. >> thank you. first of all, we are not in a position to give advice to american administration. but of course we're happy to see a new policy review, a new approach. first of all regarding the terrorist activity, not hezbollah and not hamas, not able to exist with iranian support. iranian terrorists, they are trying to, as i mentioned, to undermine the stability even in yemen and even in iraq. their efforts to cr

he is also taking aim at iran. for supporting terrorism. >> all this as tensions are rth korea.boiling point with abc's correspondent has been following the developments from washington, d.c. at this early morning hour. good morning, arlette. >> good morning. with the 100 day mark quickly approaching. president trump is diving deeper and deeper into foreign affairs. the administration talking tough on not one but two nuclear fronts. secretary of state, rex tillerson, issuing a warning on iran. comparing its behavior to north korea. >> unchecked iran has potential to travel the same path as north korea. and take the world along with it. >> reporter: those comments after tillerson notified congress that iran is complying with the nuclear deal struck with president obama. despite that, the trump administration said it is conducting a full review of that agreement. >> trump administration has no intention of passing the buck to a future administration on iran. the evidence is clear, iran's provocative actions threaten

policy toward iran and specifically review the iran nuclear deal. even though it was earlier this week the administration had announced the country was complying with elements of the deal, which was established by the obama administration and other countries, and even earlier as the administration reiterated that iran was a state sponsor of terrorism. we'll hear more from the secretary of state. with that in mind and specifically toward the iran nuclear deal, should the u.s.

it is what iran has brought in. iran may caution them not to do something. it doesn't mean they won't. i think the iraqi militias, if told to stand down by iran in syria, will have a hard time doing so. iran can control hezbollah but if hezbollah conducts attacks against the us it is at the nod of iran. if iraqi militias conduct attacks against the us in syria it could be at the nod of iran. our intelligence community will be able to find out whether or not iran's forces encourage that are at least as a, if you do it you do it on your own. that is tacit approval in my opinion because it gives them space. iam opinion because it gives them space. i am concerned about the 5000— 7000 americans in iraq who have been under threat for about two years now, with shia militias from the assad... i'm sorry, i can't think right. the people's mobilisation unit. we have different groups, mobilisation units. the leader of a terrorist organisation and —— has said he will attack the us if it goes against iran's interests. he and his militia are fighting not only in iraq